Another 3 Chinese aircraft carrier coming soon 2016-17

[Keel]

It is just hilarious to read the clownish fanboys above saying something like the Chinese aircraft carriers are to be built within one year's time each.

Just in this context, they need to fix their comprehension abilities or to fix their brians altogether or both.

 

[yusheng]

Viet, i overestimated you as you are one of the reasonable guy among them.
while you are trolling here, the hull of the second Chinese AC is under installation.

and i dont have much time to translate all the information here, i offer some links for Chinese members:
曝首艘国产航母船体准备组装 第二艘将建造 - 中国航母网
http://www.cnhangmu.com/china/1816.html

i open this thread just for record , to see China can have 4 in the next 3 years.

加拿大《汉和防务评论》11月号（提前出版）发表题为《第二艘中国国产航母最新情报》的报道称，权威的造船工业界消息来源告诉汉和，江南造船厂建造的第一艘航母的基本特征，依然是常规动力，并非核动力，此外与辽宁舰、001A北方航舰相比，设计变化较大，上蒸汽弹射器的工作进入最后研制阶段。目前图纸尚未冻结，换句话说，全部设计并未完成，由于与001A国产航母的船体动力等设计都不同，因此，第二艘航母的开工建造不会等到第一艘001A全部完成。 ...

one of my relatives is supplier for the AC project here, hehe

 

[Viet]

Viet, i overestimated you as you are one of the reasonable guy among them.
while you are trolling here, the hull of the second Chinese AC is under installation.

and i dont have much time to translate all the information here, i offer some links for Chinese members:
曝首艘国产航母船体准备组装 第二艘将建造 - 中国航母网
第二艘中国国产航母情报：蒸汽弹射 预警机或上舰 - 中国航母网

i open this thread just for record , to see China can have 4 in the next 3 years.

View attachment 177125

加拿大《汉和防务评论》11月号（提前出版）发表题为《第二艘中国国产航母最新情报》的报道称，权威的造船工业界消息来源告诉汉和，江南造船厂建造的第一艘航母的基本特征，依然是常规动力，并非核动力，此外与辽宁舰、001A北方航舰相比，设计变化较大，上蒸汽弹射器的工作进入最后研制阶段。目前图纸尚未冻结，换句话说，全部设计并未完成，由于与001A国产航母的船体动力等设计都不同，因此，第二艘航母的开工建造不会等到第一艘001A全部完成。 ...

one of my relatives is supplier for the AC project here, hehe

View attachment 177126

Can you tell some specs of the carriers under constructions?

Considering the US needs 5 years on average to build a single aircraft carrier (Nimitz class) and 5+ years for the new generation (Ford class), And America has a long history of building and operating aircraft carriers. Well, then good luck to you. why not possible with China. You only need one year. Congrat. I think building the hull is not the most complex part. Even a primitive country as Vietnam can build all sort of civil vessels including tankers of more than 100,000 tonnes of capacity.

 

[Anders]

China refueling!!!!!

 

[Keel]

China refueling!!!!!

haha 中国加油！ Go China!

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

The supercarriers 18 and 19 are rumored to be 88000 tons as the standard displacement, and 102000 tons as the full displacement, so it is comparable to the CVN-78 class supercarriers.

But this is the only the speculation from the US, and we don't know what the real project will be.

It is just hilarious to read the clownish fanboys above saying something like the Chinese aircraft carriers are to be built within one year's time each.

Just in this context, they need to fix their comprehension abilities or to fix their brians altogether or both.

The 17 from the construction to the deployment will take about 6 years.

If the 18 and the 19 are the nuclear supercarriers with the EMALS, then I won't surprised that it will take nearly a decade to complete, especially the lead ship will be very consuming to explore those uncharted technological domains.

 

[Keel]

The supercarriers 18 and 19 are rumored to be 88000 tons as the standard displacement, and 102000 tons as the full displacement, so it is comparable to the CVN-78 class supercarriers.

But this is the only the speculation from the US, and we don't know what the real project will be.

The 17 from the construction to the deployment will take about 6 years.

If the 18 and the 19 are the nuclear supercarriers with the EMALS, then I won't surprised that it will take nearly a decade to complete, especially the lead ship will be very consuming to explore those uncharted technological domains.

I can fully understand that building an aircraft carrier is very complex and it demands the most advanced technology which is different from that of building a 300K ton tanker

But my response to the above trolls is they have misread the text. The OP said the 3 ACs are rolling out of the shipyards in each of the coming 3 year respectively. The first post has mentioned the ACs have been in development BEFORE the 3 years! The ACs are not to be built within ONE year's time! That is ridiculous for the fanboys to have made the accusations that we can build an AC within one year's time.

Also as for the development the ACs, I agree with you that there hasnt anything revealed for the material constructions of the ACs anywhere until the disclosure by the OP. To be realistic, the time of 2015 to 2017 for the rolling out of the future ACs are way too optimistic I am all the way giving the OP the benefit of the doubt.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

I can fully understand that building an aircraft carrier is very complex and it demands the most advanced technology which is different from that of building a 300K ton tanker

But my response to the above trolls is they have misread the text. The OP said the 3 ACs are rolling out of the shipyards in each of the coming 3 year respectively. The first post has mentioned the ACs have been in development BEFORE the 3 years! The ACs are not to be built within ONE year's time! That is ridiculous for the fanboys to have made the accusations that we can build an AC within one year's time.

Also as for the development the ACs, I agree with you that there hasnt anything revealed for the material constructions of the ACs anywhere until the disclosure by the OP. To be realistic, the time of 2015 to 2017 for the rolling out of the future ACs are way too optimistic I am all the way giving the OP the benefit of the doubt.

I am just not quite sure if China will jump directly to the nuclear supercarrier after the CV-17.

 

[Keel]

I am just not quite sure if China will jump directly to the nuclear supercarrier after the CV-17.

well if we have acquired the tech of miniturising nuclear powered engines in subs then I can see no reason why we cannot install nuke powered engines in aircraft carrier

However, having taken into consideration of our prudence as usual approach in charting our courses in unknown waters, then I agree with you the next AC will more likely be a conventional one.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

well if we have acquired the tech of miniturising nuclear powered engines in subs then I can see no reason why we cannot install nuke powered engines in aircraft carrier

However, having taken into consideration of our prudence as usual approach in charting our courses in unknown waters, then I agree with you the next AC will more likely be a conventional one.

The nuclear reactor in the sub is different from that of the carrier.

Just look at France's nuclear carrier, which has used the nuclear reactor from the sub.

But I am quite confident that China will have its own nuclear supercarrier soon or later.

 

[Keel]

The nuclear reactor in the sub is different from that of the carrier.

Just look at France's nuclear carrier, which has used the nuclear reactor from the sub.

But I am quite confident that China will have its own nuclear supercarrier soon or later.

The 2 sentences contradict to each other
Probably you need an edit or do you mean France nuke carrier fails because of installing that from their sub?

 

[Oldman1]

Wow.Even US cant keep such a perfect schedule.

Only during times of war. A real war in a sense.

Can you tell some specs of the carriers under constructions?

Considering the US needs 5 years on average to build a single aircraft carrier (Nimitz class) and 5+ years for the new generation (Ford class), And America has a long history of building and operating aircraft carriers. Well, then good luck to you. why not possible with China. You only need one year. Congrat. I think building the hull is not the most complex part. Even a primitive country as Vietnam can build all sort of civil vessels including tankers of more than 100,000 tonnes of capacity.

View attachment 177130

I think the fastest built nuclear carrier by the U.S. was 2 years from keel laid down to launching the carrier. But since we only have one shipyard meant to built carriers and we are not at war, no need to build it fast. During the Cold War it was kind of fast, about 3 to 5 years avg. per Nimitz carrier. And also the Ford is a new ship with new technologies.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

The 2 sentences contradict to each other
Probably you need an edit or do you mean France nuke carrier fails because of installing that from their sub?

Of course, it is the later.

De Gaulle sucks badly with those mini nuclear reactors for the sub.

 

[Keel]

Of course, it is the later.

De Gaulle sucks badly with those mini nuclear reactors for the sub.

That makes sense, like fitting WS-10A under the wings of our Comac C-919

So the nuke engine for AC will be somewhere between a lion and a pussy cat

 

[Koovie]

Who made up this deadline

Chinese are getting master of this. BD should pursuit China to base one of their AC in BoB.

You should not only call them the masters of building ACC (which they are obviously not) but also the new masters of BD.